While automating the generation of protocol field documentation (after per-protocol sorting of protocol field names), I came across the conclusion that most of the protocol fields for a given protocol also share the protocol name as first part of the field name (e.g., aarp (Appletalk Address Resolution Protocol) has a field named aarp.dst.hw). However not all protocols do share this logic.

If I understand it correctly, we often refer to a protocol by 2 names: the official protocol name (e.g., as listed in IANA assigned port numbers) and an internal name.

Sometimes one protocol is defined but the IANA repository (or another body) refers to a set of related protocols. Example: the WTP protocol is used in connection-oriented WSP. We are able to decode it when using nonsecure WSP (no WTLS), this means IANA port 9201, with registered IANA protocol "name": wap-wsp-wtp.

The same is true for the WSP protocol, which exists in 2 flavors (WTLS security not considered here): connectionless (wap-wsp, port 9200) and connection-oriented (wap-wsp-wtp, port 9201). See the confusion?

Which logic should we apply to protocol names and their associated protocol field names (especially in situations where protocols implicitly refer to other protocols)?